I don't like drugs, they damage people, damage societies, increase crime and lead to all sorts of health problems. Unfortunately, outlawing them only leads to underground movements that become wealthy.

In Mexico, druglords are buried in Jardines the Humaya, where they have tombs larger and nicer than many of the homes in the country. They even have air conditioning in their tombs.

The money is so attractive to people who live in poverty that the industry grows and grows, to the point where they buy submarines and the latest technology to smuggle drugs.

So, since outlawing drugs doesn't work, it's better to legalize them and charge taxes on them while educating people about them. It's basically selecting the lesser of two evils.

I think they should be legalized and sold under doctor supervision. Like for Christmas you can go to the doctor with the family and get some morphine to really chill out in front of the television when the Christmas-special is on. But if you go back to your physician two days before new year to get some more opiates because you felt so chill the other day; he'd explain you calmly the dangers of addiction and refuse you the opiates, instead proscribing something more energizing, as befits a proper new year's eve drug...

All jokes and impractabilities aside, what we see today in drugs bussiness, is wild-west-capitalism. Anything goes. It's allright to poison costumers for short term profits, there is no control over what products are added to whichever drug of your choice.
Regulating drug use, aside from the economic gains of not spending money on catching and jailing junkies plus increased tax revenues, as well as getting out of the taboo-sphere could make potential users more informed of the dangers and the stuff itself cleaner and less dangerous.

However, legalizing and decriminalizing drugs should never mean delivering ourselves and our children to addiction. And criminality arising from drug use should be punished as severely as always, drug use should never be an extenuating circumstance.

Let us just legalize everything that mankind, or small pockets of people, want
and be done with it. Would that make everyone still about to function happy?
The line of "everyone is doing it" doesn't make it right, not even close.

Let us just legalize everything that mankind, or small pockets of people, want
and be done with it. Would that make everyone still about to function happy?
The line of "everyone is doing it" doesn't make it right, not even close.

The line "let's legalize everything then there is no more crime" isn't in place here either, imho. It's a different problem when someone's addicted to drugs than when someone robs another person. Different problems recquire different solutions.

Yes. I support legalization of light and heavy drugs, simply because we tend to promote free choice and then we declare drugs as illegal. everyone should be responsible for his actions. Legalization should imply age: who is under 21 can't use it. period.

And why should 21 be considered the age of consent/responsibility for everyone? Shouldn't each individual have the right to determine when s/he is mature enough to handle the nastier sides of life?

Each individual should determine every aspect oh his/her life. But, if we agree by social contract(T.Hobbes) to give certain part of our ingerences to the government, I think 21 is age of consent, as far as drugs are concerned. That's only my opinion. For example the one can't taste many drugs until age of 21, and at that age the one can trully decide what is good for him/her.

Each individual should determine every aspect oh his/her life. But, if we agree by social contract(T.Hobbes) to give certain part of our ingerences to the government, I think 21 is age of consent, as far as drugs are concerned. That's only my opinion. For example the one can't taste many drugs until age of 21, and at that age the one can trully decide what is good for him/her.

Meaning that, at some point, we (who have "social contracts" in the first place because the abstraction of 'absolute freedom' becomes merely 'might-makes-right' in the real world) have to make some decisions on where the line of criminality should be drawn. Inconvenience of enforcement seems to me a poor excuse to erase the line.